Both sides in the referendum campaign should stick to the facts

Compare and contrast two scenes from the same referendum. Yesterday, Sir Paul McCartney lent his voice to the Let’s Stay Together campaign with a moving message to the Scottish voters: “The decision on whether to leave our shared country is, of course, absolutely yours alone. Nevertheless [we, the English] want to let you know how very much we value our bonds of citizenship with you, and to express our hope that you will vote to renew them. What unites us is much greater than what divides us. Let’s stay together.”

The message is positive, the method of getting it across persuasive rather than didactic. It is the voice of one friend asking another to stay; as things should be in a democracy.

Compare that with the angry scenes when pro-Union Labour MP Jim Murphy tried to speak to fellow Scots last week and was pelted with eggs. They yelled “Traitor”, “Terrorist”, “Parasite” and “Quisling” at him – and he was forced to suspend his tour amid fears for his safety. Mr Murphy alleges that the abuse was co-ordinated by the Yes Scotland campaign.

It is certainly observable that aspects of the independence movement have become nastier and uglier in their tactics. For some time now, the internet has been poisoned by

so-called cybernats: an army of online nationalist activists who are rude, abusive and stalk their opponents. Alex Salmond’s office was implicated in a smear attack on the mother of a disabled child who had the affront to campaign for the Union. And in the last televised debate, Mr Salmond displayed a cocky arrogance as he wheeled out attack after attack on Mr Darling – demanding to know why he was standing on a platform with Tories, how much he truly cares about child poverty, or whether he would respect democracy. Mr Salmond was supported by a noisy chorus in the audience that was redolent of a mob.

Mr Darling has subsequently highlighted allegations that pro-Union businessmen have been put off showing support for the No campaign, fearing that SNP politicians might stonewall planning applications or that grants and procurement contracts might mysteriously dry up. Meanwhile, Andrew Gilligan reports that Business for Scotland, the pro-independence group, receives far more publicity than it deserves. It represents few significant employers, little cross-border trade, and some of its members enjoy substantial subsidies from the Scottish government.

Is it too much to ask that the referendum campaign stick to the facts? As Sir Paul stated in his Let’s Stay Together endorsement, the decision belongs to the Scots alone and – as his plea suggests – people debating the future of their country will be emotionally involved and this will partly inform how they vote. But while passion is great for democracy, bullying self-evidently is not. We hope that the pro-independence campaign calms down and that we see a lot more reason rather than febrile emotion. Happily, reason is on the side of the Union.